Rhetorical Knowledge:

Studio 6:
Yes, if a zombie apocalypse happened, our discourse community would be completely
different than the community we have right now. Sure, we have doctors, farmers,
ethicists, engineers, communicators, and politicians now, but we would need a lot
more of them because of the zombie apocalypse. The discourse communities would
be different because now we don't have to fight for food or have the struggle of looking
for food. If there was a zombie apocalypse we would have a hard time gathering food
and it would be very hard to go out and look for food since you could get eaten by a
zombie. In this zombie apocalyptic community, there would be people who were
scared all the time, people are constantly looking out for harmful things, people don't
feel safe, people are always hungry and thirsty, etc. In this new discourse community, I
think I would play the role of watching over people or going out and finding food. I feel
like this would be my best job because I am very diligent and I would get a lot
accomplished. I would be able to help out the discourse community and allow it to
survive. The rhetorical skills that I would need would be reading and writing skills so I
could teach others and it would be very easy to communicate with one another.

Writing as Activism:
Dear Benefit Representatives,
My name is Madison Kopitsch and I am a Freshman at the University of North
Carolina at Charlotte, studying business with a concentration in marketing. As
an active member in the fashion industry and cosmetic world, I believe that there
are ways to get rid of animal testing all together. Overall animal testing is
a very common practice among many different makeup brands, however, Benefit
has been one of my favorite brands for a long time and I would like to see an end
to animal testing. There are many different ways for products to be tested on
since technology has evolved so much over the past few years. For example,
there are many new and improved tests that involve technology instead of
animals, these tests include Viro testing. Viro testing is a way that experimenters
can study different cell structures without the use of animals, which allows them
to study cells that closely resemble human structures. Animal testing has been
proven to be extremely dangerous by many different organizations. According to
Cruelty Free International, over 115 million animals are used in experiments
every single year and out of those animals only twenty-two new medicines were
approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The statement above
proves my point that animal testing and the outcome of animal testing is
extremely dangerous. There are many different types of tests that cause the
animals harm these include, skin and eye irritation test, force feeding, and the
lethal dose test. These tests make the animal feel very uncomfortable as not only
are they in an unnatural environment, they are also subjected to extreme pain
and harsh conditions. No animal deserves to face such extreme physical pain,
and this is the main reason that I am advocating the end of animal testing.
 Humans must stop abusing their power over defenseless animals and begin to
use the technological advancements we
have to test our cosmetic products. Not only will this make companies like
Benefit more ethical in their practices, it will ensure safety, well-being, and
ultimately a long-lasting and fair life for our animals.
Sincerely,
Madison Kopitsch

Critical Reading:
Annotated Bibliography:
Dewey, John. The Ethics of Animal Experimentation. The Atlantic, Atlantic Media
Company,1Sept.1926,www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1926/09/the-ethics-of-
animal-experimentation/305429/.

This source, in my opinion is considered to be a reliable and credible article that

contains information that relates to animal testing. This article has a strong opinion about
why animal testing is okay and not wrong. Even though I believe that animal testing is
questionable, this article brings up very good points. Some of these points include different
ways that animal testing is right and how to sometimes is looked down upon. If someone
asked what this article was about I would say that it goes over the main parts of animal
testing and how testing on animals has led to safer products for humans. The main point
that I got from this article was that animal experimentation is considered to be a selfish
willingness to inflict physical pain upon others simply to save physical pain to ourselves.
This statement basically states the honest truth; people would rather save their self, than
save a helpless animal. Which is an okay perspective to have, however there are others
that believe animals should not be treated in a harmful manner, because they are just like
people. According to The Ethics of Animal Experimentation, John Dewey argued that
experimenting on animals when talking about medical advancement is okay. Dewey
believes that even though there are downsides to testing on animals, people all over the
world are benefitting from the tests, therefore they should be continued. His views, in my
opinion are objective, because he understands the benefits of experimentation and as well
as the drawbacks. Yes, this information is one-hundred percent credible information. I
know this, because while doing my research I only picked out articles that gave reliable
information. The material found in this particular article, is considered to be a website
published by an association and an author. The association that published, John Deweys
ideas was a website called, The Atlantic. The purpose of this specific type of
communication was to inform the reader about why the author, John Dewey, thinks that
animal experimentation is ethical. He goes over many different reasonings which are very
persuasive and make the reader stop and think about what he is saying. The intended
audience that he is trying to reach out to is the people who believe that animal testing is
unethical. John Dewey is trying to get others to understand how much experimenting on
animals has helped people throughout the years. This source is completely different than
any other sources on my bibliography, because this is the only source that agrees with
 animal experimentation. This source was the most helpful source while finding my
research because, because it gave me another perspective to look at, instead of just
viewing animal testing one way. I am definitely going to be using this particular source in
my research paper, because I need different perspectives in order to get a well rounded
idea of my concept.

Harris, Richard. Drugs That Work In Mice Often Fail When Tried In People. NPR, NPR, 10
Apr.2017,www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/04/10/522775456/drugs-that-work-in-
mice-often-fail-when-tried-in-people.

The article, Drugs That Work in Mice Often Fail When Tried In People, is a well
developed source that gives the reader, credible information about the topic they are learning
about. This article is about how mice have been used for testing new products on for centuries.
This source describes how experimenters have grouped rodents and humans together, even
though the human body and the rodent body are extremely different. The author, Richard Harris
states that its not a shock that some of the tests that work on rodents, dont work on humans
because our evolutionary make up is different. The research, Garner states that if the research
that involved the mice was related more to how humans live, the experimentation process would
run a lot smoother. Also every time a study is conducting on animals like rodents, there is a
price that must be paid. Conducting research is very expensive and when an experiment fails or
doesnt do as well as the scientist thought, then people get upset. The main topic presented in
this article is related to how some scientist like Petsko, believe that scientist could learn a lot
more about helping people if they studied human cells instead of a whole entire animal. This
article has many different examples and studies from a lot of different schools and research
centers. The statement, You have to think outside of the model Box. Mice and rats aren't
simplified humans. Scientists should stop thinking they are completely summarizes the whole
concept of this article. The author of this article is objective, because he is open to new ideas.
The author talked to many different scientists and experimenters and they came up with the
conclusion that rodents and humans are not the same, therefore we should stop experimenting
like they are. Yes, the information is reliable in this article is reliable and accurate. According to
the Information present in the article, this source is a website published by an association. This
source was very helpful because it provided me with a lot of different examples regarding
animal testing. This source will appear in my project because it has a lot of information that
relates to my topic.

Sneddon, Lynne. Web of Science. Web of Science [V.5.25.1] - All Databases Full Record,
COMPANY OF BIOLOGISTS LTD, BIDDER BUILDING CAMBRIDGE
COMMERCIAL PARK COWLEY RD, CAMBRIDGE CB4 4DL, CAMBS,
ENGLAND, Sept. 2017, apps.webofknowledge.com/full_record.do? product=UA
&search_mode=GeneralSearch&qid=15& SID=2FIbHwyFfjkbpChTJ3t&page=1
&doc=2.

This source is a scholarly/peer-reviewed journal article where many different authors and
Professors checked over for the use of accurate information. The main points that were
 brought up in this peer review include determining the guidelines and ethics of animal
use within specific environments. In this journal there are three main factors that play an
important role with determining if something is ethical or not. These three factors are
called the 3Rs; Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement. Throughout this source,
many different topics are brought to attention, including animal behavior, toxicology,
biomechanics and many more. All of these topics play a role with experimenting on
animals. If someone were to ask me what this source was about I would say that it was
more involved with the scientific end of ideas instead of being opinion based. The facts
that were stated throughout the whole abstract show that there are scientific reasons as
to why scientist do what they do. The author(s) that wrote this peer-review, knew exactly
what they were talking about. The author who wrote this and the peer-editors who
reviewed this work are not biased and neither objective. The author was simply stating
the facts about animal experimentation. However the author, Lynne Sneddon is leading
a Bioveterinary science field in Liverpool which conducts research on animal welfare.
Therefore, she is an active member with researching animal experimentation. This
source is academic, because it was found in UNCC libraries database for science. The
purpose of this communication was to inform the reader about different ways that animal
testing affects science and how researchers are trying to find new ways to test
chemicals without the use of animals. The intended audience are people who are
interested in knowing more information about animal testing and how animal behavior is
observed while experimentation. Compared to my other sources, this is a lot more
factual based than opinion-based. The other sources talk about the authors or
contributors opinions while this source does not. This source does work and fit into my
research because it gives a lot more facts and evidence that support my topic. However,
this source does not shape my argument or where I stand on the matter of animal
testing and I plan to use some of the information I read about in my research paper. It
also helped to make up my mind as to where I fall on the whole topic of animal testing, I
am against it.

Cruelty Free International. Cruelty Free International, Cruelty Free International,

www.crueltyfreeinternational.org/company-information.

This source is a website that is only about my topic and nothing else. On this website
there is a lot of different information including many ways that you can help raise
awareness to animal testing. For example, there is a tab that says What you can do
and under this tab there is a place to donate, ways to raise money for animals, raise
awareness, go cruelty free, and get involved. The Cruelty Free International website is a
place where people can go to help stop animal experimentation and testing. They are
heavily involved with stopping animal testing for good which states that their perspective
is against animal testing. This organization argues that there is no need for animal
testing when there are new technologies that can closely resemble humans more than
animals can. According to the information on the website, I would say that the authors
are biased because they are trying to stop animal testing, therefore they dont want to
consider the other perspective. Overall this source is very credible and gives accurate
 information regarding animal experimentation, therefore I would say that this is an
academic source. The website gives an accurate description as to why someone should
support the fight against animal testing and it gives a lot of valid reasoning. The purpose
of this website is to inform the audience about the cons of animal testing and ways that
they can get involved on their own. This website is definitely a source that I am going to
use on my research paper and with my research going forward.

Group Inquiry Project:

http://animalactivsm.weebly.com

100 Word Response:

This writing piece by Peter Elbow relates to students in school the most, because
he states that there are two types of reading, believing and doubting. In my experience
many students and people use the doubting game because they are judging what they
are reading, when they should be looking more into the context of the writing. I wish I
could say I fall into the category of believing, but I dont. Both ways of viewing text are
very important to be able to understand and accomplish. However, sometimes one
outweighs the other. The most important thing to do is evaluate all of your writings and
readings as you would when making a difficult decision.

Composing Processes:
Group Inquiry Project:
http://animalactivsm.weebly.com

Research Essay:
Final Research Paper Draft
Throughout the years, animal testing has been a very controversial topic for many people.
Experimenters and others have come up with different theories as to why people agree and
disagree with the concept of animal testing. Some people believe that animal testing is the only
way we can figure out information regarding the health of humans. Cruelty Free International
states that the top five countries for animal testing include the United States, Japan, China,
Australia, and France. However, over the past few years, animal testing in China has increased
since the 1980s. However, over the years technology has changed so drastically that there is
no need for animals to be tested on. Animals were used as test subjects, because they were
believed to be the only things that closely resembled humans. Now, new theories and ideas
prove that not all animals resemble humans as closely as we thought they do. For example,
there are many new and improved tests that involve technology instead of animals, these tests
include Viro testing. Viro testing is a way that experimenters can study different cell structures
without the use of animals, which allows them to study cells that closely resemble human
structures. The most common test that are completed on animals are skin and eye irritation
tests. During a eye irritation test, a substance like droplets or chemicals will be placed in the
animal's eye and then the animal will be observed for a long period of time. At the end of almost
all of these experiments, the animals suffer a lot of consequences like bleeding, ulcers,
blindness, and death.
Experimenters put all different types of chemicals on the skin of a rabbit or rat and watch
to see how it affects the animal. According to various studies, researchers have come to the
conclusion that humans and animal test subjects like rats, bunnies, monkeys, etc do not have a
lot in common. Thomas Hartung, an animal activist, states that it is very hard to find an animal
that closely resembles the same parts as a human. He agrees that animals testing is extremely
cruel, inhumane, and flat out wrong. According to the article, Drugs That Work in Mice Often
Fail When Tried In People, Harris Richard states that even though experimenters know that
human bodies and rodent bodies are extremely different, they continue testing on them.
Thomas Hartung and Harris Richard agree that there is always a price to pay while
experimenting on animals whether it be money wise or harmful. The statement, You have to
think outside of the model box. Mice and rats aren't simplified humans. Scientists should stop
thinking they are completely summarizes the whole concept of Harris Richards theory.
Conducting research is very expensive and when an experiment fails or doesnt do as well as
the scientist thought, then people get upset. Many different scientists believe that experimenters
could learn more about helping people if they studied the way human cells work and function
instead of small animals that have no correlation to humans.
In a regular laboratory setting, animals are kept in small, tiny cages and they are put into
uncomfortable positions. Every laboratory that tests on animals is suppose to be inspected, but
since experimentation is so common, there are not enough inspectors to go around to every lab
and look around. Therefore, this causes a lot of problems for not only the animals, but the
people who work inside the lab. Most animals that live in a laboratory tend to show signs of
depression or sadness, because they do not get the regular interaction with other animals as
they usually would in the wilderness. Studies haven proven that animals that spend most of their
lives locked in a cage will show signs of either aggression and depression. Even though the
animals that are tested on are not important, they still are important to different ecosystems
and need interaction with other animals to remain sane. Some people may argue that animals
do not feel the same way as humans do, but if you think about it and watch the behavior of the
animals who spend time with other animals and those that dont, you can see the difference in
attitude. When an animal is tested on, they are kept by themselves and are not allowed any
interaction with the other animals, so they cannot contaminate the experiment. These animals
are forced to have chemicals shoved down their throats, machines drilled into their skulls, teeth
pulled, etc. However, people who are for animal experimentation state that there are rules put in
place to make sure inhumane acts like those listed above do not happen. Animals are protected
under the Animal Welfare Act, which was established in 1966. The Animal Welfare Act is a
federal law that establishes the standard care of the animals whom are being experimented on.
However, excludes ninety-five percent of animals and the other five percent are limited with their
protection.
Some may view animal experimentation as the best thing the world ever invented, while
others view it as a horrible creation. People who agree with experimenting on animals have
researched and gathered an adequate amount of information, which helps to get their point
across. For example, like most controversial topics, animal testing has people who are for it and
those who are one hundred percent against it. The people who agree with animal testing also
agree with the following animal experimentation is responsible for the development of asthma
inhalers, it is necessary for human safety, there are many laws that are in place in order to keep
the animals safe and to make sure they are not harmed in an inhumane way, and people who
support animal testing agree that animals are better to test on than humans. Those who are
against the idea like PETA, view animal testing as something that could be avoided all together.
They believe that animals are being harmed in unethical ways and that these tests are highly
unreliable. According to Cruelty Free International, over 115 million animals are used in
experiments every single year and out of those animals only twenty-two new medicines were
approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Out of the twenty-two drugs, many of them
were used for rare diseases. There have been many different cases where drugs that have
been considered safe are actually very dangerous. For example, a drug that was released in
May of 1999, Vioxx, was supposedly safe when it was tested on monkeys, but has caused more
than 320,000 heart attacks and strokes and over 140,000 deaths worldwide. Another drug that
was used to help with anxiety and Parkinson's disease was tested in France in 2016, where one
volunteer was killed and others were left brain damaged. Ninety-two percent of products or
chemicals that are said to be safe in animal testing, fail in human trials. These products are too
dangerous and harmful for humans, therefore, there is no guarantee that a drug will be one
hundred percent good for humans to use. So the question I ask you, why do we continue testing
on animals, when studies have shown that half of the time the drugs dont work?
As stated above, animal experimentation is a well known topic around the world, however
a lot of people do not know how to get involved. The most important way to get involved with
fighting for animals is educate yourself and those around you. The more information that you
know about a topic, the more information you can raise awareness about. The topic of fighting
for animal rights may seem silly or not important to some people, because they believe that
animals have no feelings. These innocent creatures are being tested on and they have no say in
whats going to happen to them. The organization, PETA, is helping to create awareness about
animal testing and letting their voices be heard. PETA and over six million supporters, focus
mostly on animals that suffer in the food industry, clothing industry, laboratory settings, and the
entertainment industry. These four main industries cause animals the most pain and suffering
because there is nothing we can do to stop it. The one industry that would most likely be the
easiest to convince about putting an end to animal testing includes the clothing and cosmetic
industry. There are a lot of cosmetic brands that do not test on animals, but there is a majority of
them that still do and there are ways that we could change that.
After everything's said and done, the concept of animal testing has had its ups and downs,
but many have come to the conclusion that animal testing needs to be viewed from a different
angle. There are still many people that believe that animal experimentation is one of the best
ways to discover new and up incoming information regarding the safety of humans. However,
many disagree and say that the way the animal testing industry uses animals is unethical. In
order to come up with a solution of animal testing and if it is ethical or unethical, researchers
should reevaluate the rules and laws that were passed regarding animal testing. If researchers
were able to possibly make new laws that involved animal rights, I feel as though people would
stop protesting and fighting the government so much. In many different ways animals are very
similar to humans, but they also vary in certain circumstances. Many different organizations
have gathered a lot of facts and information regarding the whole idea of animal testing.
Therefore this new information could help the animals fight for their rights, because they cannot
do it alone. These animals need their voices to be heard and the only way to do that is by
fighting for them and standing by them no matter what.

100 Word Response:

The composing process is a way to finalize your work and projects. People use the
composing process to make their ideas and work become even greater. This processes is really
important to the editing stage of all different types of work. This is because before you turn
anything in, whether its for a grade or for a work environment, you need to make sure it was
done to the best of your ability. In the video the women talks about how important the process
actually is. The composing process was made to deepen your understanding and views on your
own work and to look at it from a different perspective.

Knowledge of Conventions:

Module 4
Step 1 tweets:
1. Why do people agree with animal testing? For every person who has owned a dog or
household pet, would you want them being tested on? So why do we continue animal
experimentation?
2. Keeping animals the belong in the wild in a cage or at the zoo is completely wrong. Why
dont people learn, the more an animal is locked up, the more aggressive it may be.
3. I dont follow politics, but I know for a fact that most of what's going on in this world is
messed up.
4. People stereotype all greek life as a lot of partying and drinking, but what they dont
know is that were one of the hardest working groups on campus.
5. Twitter is a way to communicate your thoughts and feelings in a abbreviated form rather
than a whole paragraph. It helps you to limit what you say and make sure what youre
saying is right to the point.

Step #2:
https://imgflip.com/i/1xgp0g
Step #3:

So What Questions?
My followers include mostly all of my friends, I can honestly say that I either know or
know of the followers that follow me on social media. If I was to post this meme on my
account, my friends and family would agree with my statement.
Yes, my followers will be able to see this meme clearly and they are going to be able to
read it well too.
 On twitter I have a limit and on instagram I can write as much as I want
100 word Response:
In this particular course I learned a lot about convections in general. I now understand
that there are various forms of writing. These forms range anywhere from multimedia based to
paper and research based. I have also learned various grammatical skills that will further
improve my writing skills forever. Throughout this semester Ive learned how to keep a sentence
from becoming a run on sentence and capturing the major points that I am trying to get across
to my audience. While learning about grammar and spelling, I was able to revise and edit my
papers, projects, and studios to the best of my ability.